Testy Copy Editors
http://www.testycopyeditors.org/phpBB3/

Bunt or not.
http://www.testycopyeditors.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7239
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Phillip Blanchard [ Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:53 am ]
Post subject:  Bunt or not.

For you numbers fans: The Numbers Guy.

Author:  Vanderhoof Viking [ Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:52 am ]
Post subject: 

I wonder where all the stats are on how often the bunter in that situation a) pops the ball up, resulting in a double play because the runners are moving, or b) puts the bunt in a place where a play can be made i) at third base, leaving runners at first and second with one out, or ii) at third and then over to first, leaving two out and a runner on second.
I suspect if Randolph had called the bunt and either of those scenarios had occurred, the same 'experts' critical of him for not bunting would have been calling for his head for bunting.
Floyd was probably the best pinch hitter he had left, and Cliff ain't a bunter. That made it an easy decision for Randolph.

Author:  J Kaufman [ Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:48 am ]
Post subject: 

I agree. Endy Chavez's play will be remembered forever in Mets' lore, rather like Ron Swoboda's. [Another banana bat, by the way, hence his nickname Ron Swatboda.] Floyd's bat was sorely missed in the series. However, it will be Beltran who will be booed lustily next season, which is unfair but inevitable.

Author:  Wayne Countryman [ Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:48 am ]
Post subject: 

Good points, V V. Statistics don't mean much unless you factor in the actual players involved--batter, pitcher, fielders and runners.

How many times has Floyd bunted in the past few years? How good is he at it? Anyone on the bench better at it? (Glavine, perhaps? Though the corner infielders would have crowded him.)

Even while hurt Floyd has a good chance of hitting a sac fly. Same result as a sac bunt, but if he's swinging away, the possibility exists of the ball going for extra bases.

The Mets were unlikely to win unless they got at least one hit. One double or two singles could have done it. Floyd might not have been any more likely to bunt successfully than he was to hit successfully or hit a sacrifice fly. And his chances of not making at least one out by bunting were near zero.

Author:  Wayne Countryman [ Thu Oct 26, 2006 4:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

J Kaufman wrote:
I agree. Endy Chavez's play will be remembered forever in Mets' lore, rather like Ron Swoboda's. [Another banana bat, by the way, hence his nickname Ron Swatboda.] Floyd's bat was sorely missed in the series. However, it will be Beltran who will be booed lustily next season, which is unfair but inevitable.


Yup on all counts.

Someone (Kevin Kennedy?) on TV said that if the Mets had won, Chavez's catch would be remembered like Willie Mays' robbery off Vic Wertz in the 1954 Series. You could make a strong argument that Chavez's was more difficult. He didn't make the throw that Mays did, but his was plenty good enough.

Swoboda's catch was a good one--especially considering that he was such a mediocre fielder. ["Banana bat": will have to remember that one.]
But some of us here have made catches like Swoboda's in our little sandlot worlds. I've never seen anything like Chavez's in person, including at MLB games. And few on TV.

The Mets played well with two important pitchers out with injuries and Floyd hobbling. They have several excellent young players and others that will be stronger because of the experience.
Was surprising to see Beltran strike out the way he did at the end, but to blame the loss on him would be unfair. He had a decent series.

Author:  Vanderhoof Viking [ Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

Wanted to make sure I got info right.
From ESPN.com:
Game 3 of the '92 Series. Fourth inning. First and second. No out. David Justice smoked what looked like a sure extra-base hit to the deepest part of Skydome. But White, who could really motor in those days, raced after it, leaped, snared it and crashed into the wall at full speed.
Had the play ended there, it would have been great enough. But White bounced off the fence, turned and fired the ball back to the infield for what should have been a triple play. Except second-base umpire Bob Davidson blew the call as Deion Sanders was tagged by third baseman Kelly Gruber just before diving back into second base. The next day, after seeing the replay, Davidson admitted he'd gotten it wrong.

I remember that as being a great play, and I think, like Chavez's, it may be downgraded a bit because of what it wasn't. White's wasn't a triple play starter; Chavez's didn't win the game for his team.
Still great plays.
Note: Heard a call earlier this year on a TV game where the announcer referred to "an inning-ending triple play." That's about the only kind I know, but thanks for making it clear.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/